One of the aims of journalism is to identify injustice and hold the powerful to account, so it’s odd that ITN – which makes news for Channel 4, Channel 5 and ITV – remains so unwilling to examine its own wrongdoing. Women who work for ITN have tried to report harassment and discrimination, but soon after doing so found themselves suddenly out of a job and bound by non-disclosure agreements.
I spent seven years in Channel 4 News as a journalist and commissioning editor. It was my perfect job. Colleagues felt like family and we forged strong bonds. After the Black Lives Matter movement started, Anna Mallett, then ITN chief executive, had a message for staff: ‘The time for change is now,’ she said. Anyone suffering discrimination must report it, for the good of us all. Her request made sense: how can a culture improve if no one mentions the problems? Mallett said she wanted inclusivity. I believed her.
Reluctantly I reported some concerns, just as requested. It was the worst mistake of my career
As it happened, I could see some problems. I was involved in women’s groups at ITN and I heard some alarming stories. Women, myself included, felt bullied and harassed from time to time but those who spoke up felt that no one listened. I encountered one woman who had tried to speak to her line manager sobbing, and I started to worry that victims were being punished for trying to improve the culture.
Reluctantly and very carefully, I reported some concerns, just as requested. It was the worst mistake of my career, as it turned out, and the most isolating experience of my life.
I soon found out I was not alone. Several women in the Channel 4 newsroom felt trapped in a complaints process, often against the same editors. I thought this strengthened my point, but ITN said I was not allowed to use them as examples in my case. I was told that I could complain only for myself, not about the culture for women in Channel 4 News. But why? To me, journalism is about asking questions on behalf of others.
The process took its toll on me. I became unwell. I took time off and discovered I wasn’t the first to do this either. Others were in crises after speaking up, not just in Channel 4 News but right across ITN. I asked one Channel 4 News presenter about the number of women leaving our newsroom. ‘Nobody tells me anything,’ came the reply, ‘and I’ve learned not to ask.’ An odd comment for a professional inquisitor. Some colleagues supported me, and one figure stood out: Jon Snow is a man of principle and kindness.
When in the end I had to leave, there was no farewell card, no flowers, no one made a speech. Nothing. Having attended dozens of happy ITN send-offs, I was hurt and baffled until it dawned on me that I was becoming an unperson. A senior Channel 4 figure cheerfully messaged me to say that she didn’t know what had happened but assumed it was ‘all shrouded in NDAs.’ Why assume so, if this was not a pattern? She was, of course, right. I had been paid off and given an NDA to sign, my second at Channel 4 News.
My first silenced a group of mothers (including me) so that we wouldn’t mention maternity discrimination: on returning to work part-time, our pay was docked below pro rata. ITN blamed the NDA on Acas, who arbitrated, and promised never to gag its own again. But it continued – just in secret. I was later served a ‘confidentiality clause’, a semantic distinction that allowed ITN to claim it doesn’t do NDAs.
Clause 11.4 of my paperwork states: ‘The Employee undertakes to keep confidential and not directly or indirectly reveal or disclose the existence, terms and circumstances of this Agreement to any person, firm or company.’ Clause 11.5 prohibits me from saying anything disparaging about ITN and ‘associated companies, their shareholders, officers and employees or any statement which might damage their reputation or interests’. The document says any of those parties can apply for an injunction to silence me.
ITN says that whistleblowing clauses provide a right to speak about wrongdoing. I assume this refers to UK laws protecting whistleblowing and hope they cover me today. But NDAs are written in a way to sow confusion and their pernicious effect is to make people fearful of exercising their basic right to speak. Even the statutory protection is not enough: it defends whistleblowing, but what about speaking in other contexts? The wording of my document means, for example, I cannot attend NHS group therapy for help. My document also says ITN officials cannot tell their own colleagues about the NDAs’ existence. Perhaps that’s why ITN issues these denials: maybe even company leaders don’t know the truth?
So why did I sign an NDA? The answer was I had to for the sake of my children. The alternative was to wait years for a tribunal, and with no salary and legal bills mounting, that wasn’t viable. I felt broken and was offered no choice, and I imagine the same is true for others who sign NDAs: it’s a way out of legal hell. But it comes at a long-term cost.
Outside ITN, I have found more vulnerable ex-colleagues who complain of being treated in the same way as I was, or worse. I’ve met award-winning journalists who have tried to report harassment and discrimination, including disability discrimination, but who have been gagged. Between us, we have been paid hundreds of thousands of pounds (though for many, the payout was lost to legal fees). That money, surely, would be better spent solving the problems we’ve raised than on silencing us.
Pressure groups have taken up our cause: ‘Can’t Buy My Silence’ and ‘Pregnant Then Screwed’ campaigned for ITN journalists to be released from their gagging orders. ITN says it investigates all wrongdoing allegations made by staff members and it decided last April not to issue any more NDAs. Well, not ‘as a matter of course’ anyway. But we’ve heard this before. Five years ago it promised an ITV News presenter, Mary Nightingale (in her words) ‘no more NDAs — ever’. So much for that.
There was a debate about all this in parliament last week. The former culture secretary Maria Miller said that she has been approached by various ex-ITN staff whom she has also tried (without success) to release from their gagging orders. NDAs, she argued, should really have no place in the workplace. My sense is that, sooner or later, the best employers will start to agree. I hope that ITN might be one of them.
EDITOR’S NOTE: We asked ITN to comment and they sent a statement: ‘ITN is committed to an inclusive, transparent and respectful culture and we reject entirely the suggestion that this historical allegation was not fairly and thoroughly investigated three years ago. We have a duty of care to all individuals involved in any workplace dispute and therefore it would be inappropriate to comment on specific circumstances. Since April 2022, ITN no longer routinely uses confidentiality clauses in settlement agreements.’
Comments